HomeGlobal Village‘Mother of Parliaments shut down by father of lies’: UK Supreme Court...

‘Mother of Parliaments shut down by father of lies’: UK Supreme Court told

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments over whether Boris Johnson was right in suspending Parliament. His opponents claim he did so to silence opposition to his plans to take Britain out of the EU on October 31, with or without a divorce deal with Brussels.

In the second of three days of highly-charged arguments over whether Johnson’s advice to Queen Elizabeth II to suspend the legislature was unlawful, Britain’s highest court was told that his move was destroying parliamentary democracy.

Eadie said cabinet documents had been produced which showed the aim of prorogation was to bring forward a new legislative agenda.

The lawyer representing around 75 parliamentarians who challenged Johnson’s actions said the premier had unlawfully abused his power by closing parliament for five weeks until October 14 — with Britain due to leave the EU on October 31.

One might think that a government “would engage solely in high politics as opposed to low, dishonest dirty tricks but I’m not sure we can assume that of this government,” lawyer Aidan O’Neill said.

“The mother of parliaments is being shut down by the father of lies. Rule that this prorogation is an unlawful abuse of power,” O’Neill told judges.

“Enough is enough.”

Johnson, who took office in July, says he prorogued, or suspended, parliament to open a new session with a fresh legislative agenda.

His opponents claim he did so to silence opposition to his plans to take Britain out of the EU on October 31, with or without a divorce deal with Brussels.

‘Stymie parliament’ claim ‘unsustainable’

The Supreme Court is hearing appeals against two conflicting lower court decisions. Scotland’s highest civil court found the suspension was unlawful, but the High Court in England said it was not a matter for judges to intervene in.

Surely it can’t get any more Orwellian than this?

Boris Johnson is filmed lying at precise moment lawyers are in Court trying to convince Supreme Court he’s not a liar. 🤥

He said parliament had previously passed laws on prorogation, but there was no law relevant to the case and so England’s High Court was right that prorogation was not something the judiciary could intervene in.

Eadie said any decision to prorogue parliament was “inherently and fundamentally political in nature” as it concerned managing the government’s legislative agenda, curtailing parliamentary debate and deciding on when it might be appropriate to end a sitting.

“This is, we submit, therefore the territory of political judgement, not legal standards,” he said.

True Reasons

Judge Nicholas Wilson questioned Eadie on the lack of a witness statement from the prime minister. “Isn’t it odd that nobody has signed a witness statement to say ‘this is true, these are the true reasons for what was done’?” he asked.

England’s High Court was right that prorogation was not something the judiciary could intervene in.

Eadie said cabinet documents had been produced which showed the aim of prorogation was to bring forward a new legislative agenda.

But O’Neill said the few documents offered could not be taken as the “whole truth”, adding: “We cannot have a situation… where prorogation can be used with impunity to close down parliament whenever it becomes inconvenient.”

A maximum 11 of the 12 Supreme Court judges are hearing the case. They have not said when they intend to make a ruling following Thursday’s closing hearings, during which lawyers for the Scottish government and for 1990s prime minister John Major are due to intervene.

Global Village Space is a news web portal that aims to provide a platform to all to promote dialogue and understanding. The portal will present all shades of opinion to enhance understanding. We encourage our writers to be respectfully irreverent and our readers to be tolerant.